Relative misrepresented that they bought a house

[Anonymous]

There are many reasons why only one name might be listed on public record. None of it is OP's business. This relative isn't looking to OP for money or advice. The fact that she went out of her way to look it up speaks poorly of her character.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:WTH OP? What a horrible post.

Why would anyone look up the public record for the house? That’s creepy and this post is nasty, OP.

This.

+1 And I completely agree with 10:28 on page 1 who says that my opinion would change of the person who looked up that information and then gossiped about it. Whether that was you, OP, or if you're just being malicious in spreading the gossip, you need to know that I would probably never want to associate with you again. You sound pretty vile.

[Anonymous]

Op is right. If he is not on the title he is not a owner. So he is a liar regardless of circumstances.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are many reasons why only one name might be listed on public record. None of it is OP's business. This relative isn't looking to OP for money or advice. The fact that she went out of her way to look it up speaks poorly of her character.

I don’t think so. It just validated her suspicion of him. Somehow she knew he was sketched.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When you are together with someone in a permanent and long term way than who is on whatever paperwork doesn't make that much of a difference. My husband 'bought' my car but it comes out of our joint checking account, he was just the one who went to the dealership that day (after I price compared/found/picked out the car I wanted).

Don't be a nosey nancy OP, just makes YOU look ugly.

If you are UNmarried and driving around HIS car that HE owns and he suddenly passes away, his estate would go through probate and the car given to his next of kin which ain't you sweetie - unless he has a will that gives the car to you. Unmarried SOs do not have the same protections as married people do.

Before dh and I married we each owned our own cars and we each owned the house we had bought together 50/50. This was before we had kids and it worked out well for us.

That is true from a practical perspective but OP isn't asking about the wisdom of such arrangements, she's accusing her relative of lying. And it is very possible (I would say highly likely) that the relative does not feel like they were lying because of this technicality, however badly it exposes them in the event of their SO's passing.

This. Even if the relative doesn't legally own the house, if they are living there and helping to pay for it, they might say "SO and I bought a house" or "We bought a house" or even "I bought a house" without trying to deceive anyone.

Oh, come on. The relative knows if they signed a contract and went through the whole closing process of buying a house. They know if they met with an attorney or not to get their name put on the deed. Saying "Look everyone! I bought a house!" Is a lie. Saying, "I am moving into Sam's house and I would love to see you at our house warming party" that would be the truth.

If you don't want to get into who owns what then - Do Not Bring It Up in the first place. This truly is not anyone else's business but your own (and Sam's).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op is right. If he is not on the title he is not a owner. So he is a liar regardless of circumstances.

I agree. By why lie about something like this?

[Anonymous]

My neighbors sold their house to a single woman last summer. They met her at the closing, one name on all documents, etc. New owner moves in with boyfriend. Boyfriend starts complaining to neighbors about stuff in the neighborhood, how "we really thought this neighborhood would be different before we bought." I said "don't you mean before [girlfriend] bought?" Turns out it's only in her name so the house can't be leveraged by the court for all the years of unpaid support for his 3 children.
They do have a cute puppy, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My neighbors sold their house to a single woman last summer. They met her at the closing, one name on all documents, etc. New owner moves in with boyfriend. Boyfriend starts complaining to neighbors about stuff in the neighborhood, how "we really thought this neighborhood would be different before we bought." I said "don't you mean before [girlfriend] bought?" Turns out it's only in her name so the house can't be leveraged by the court for all the years of unpaid support for his 3 children.
They do have a cute puppy, though.

It's not his house. He is living in her house.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op is right. If he is not on the title he is not a owner. So he is a liar regardless of circumstances.

I agree. By why lie about something like this?

Because he has something to hide. What that is ..who knows.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My neighbors sold their house to a single woman last summer. They met her at the closing, one name on all documents, etc. New owner moves in with boyfriend. Boyfriend starts complaining to neighbors about stuff in the neighborhood, how "we really thought this neighborhood would be different before we bought." I said "don't you mean before [girlfriend] bought?" Turns out it's only in her name so the house can't be leveraged by the court for all the years of unpaid support for his 3 children.
They do have a cute puppy, though.

It's not his house. He is living in her house.

I agree with you. Which is why when he wants to talk about the fence separating our yards, or trees that hang over, I tell him to have the owner talk to me.

[Anonymous]

I can totally get Internet stalking the guy but the logic of starting this thread really escapes me.

[Anonymous]

It could be that his significant other bought the house with inheritance. She may have wanted to keep asset separate so it stays with her. If she adds his name to title then he is entitled to half.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My neighbors sold their house to a single woman last summer. They met her at the closing, one name on all documents, etc. New owner moves in with boyfriend. Boyfriend starts complaining to neighbors about stuff in the neighborhood, how "we really thought this neighborhood would be different before we bought." I said "don't you mean before [girlfriend] bought?" Turns out it's only in her name so the house can't be leveraged by the court for all the years of unpaid support for his 3 children.
They do have a cute puppy, though.

It's not his house. He is living in her house.

I agree with you. Which is why when he wants to talk about the fence separating our yards, or trees that hang over, I tell him to have the owner talk to me.

Exactly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It could be that his significant other bought the house with inheritance. She may have wanted to keep asset separate so it stays with her. If she adds his name to title then he is entitled to half.

There is nothing wrong with buying a house in your own name. The issue is having a non-owner claim to own the house when they really don't.

A non-owner is not responsible for property taxes, they can't be foreclosed upon, they have no legal authority to deal with property issues like fences and trees. They don't have the rights of ownership but they also don't have the responsibilities of ownership, either. Unless they've signed a lease with the owner, they are free to move out and buy their own place if that's what they want to do.

[Anonymous]

Wow my husband and I just bought a house and I’m not on the title since I own other property it would’ve complicated the loan process and he qualified on his own. We’ve been married 29 years!